|
IO
<br /> •TABLE 1 -CHECKLIST OF REQUIRED DAT
<br /> FOR NO FURTHER ACTION REQUESTS AT UNDERGROUND TANK SITES
<br /> Site Name and Location TEmies General Store,4407 East Waterloo Road, Stockton, San Joaquin County(RB#390796)
<br /> y 1. Distance to production wells for municipal, domestic, A 2011 sensitive receptor survey and GeoTracker
<br /> agriculture, industry and other uses within 2000 feet of the site. identified 24 domestic and 3 public supply wells located
<br /> within 2000'of the site, including a domestic well 900'to
<br /> the south and an active public supply 1,050'to northwest.
<br /> None of the wells are threatened by the release.
<br /> Y 2. Site maps, to scale, of area impacted showing locations of In November 1993 a dispenser piping release was
<br /> any former and existing tank systems, excavation contours and observed and reported by the local agency.
<br /> sample locations, boring and monitoring well elevation In January 1999, one 12,000-gallon and two 10,000-gallon
<br /> contours, gradients, and nearby surface waters, buildings, "fuel"USTs were removed from the site.
<br /> streets, and subsurface utilities;
<br /> Y 150'b 3. Figures depicting lithology(cross section), treatment system Site lith , the consists of clay,silt,sand and gravel to
<br /> gsthe total depth investigated.
<br /> diagrams;
<br /> :N:l 4. Stockpiled soil remaining on-site or off-site disposal(quantity); The fate of the excavated soil is not discussed in the
<br /> available reports or regulatory correspondence.
<br /> �YD 5. Monitoring wells remaining on-site, fate; Five monitoring wells(MW--1 through MW-5), and six remediation wells(VW-1
<br /> through VW-6) were properly abandoned on 20 September 2011.
<br /> 6. Tabulated results of all groundwater Depth to groundwater varied from 57'to 76'bgs. Groundwater flow
<br /> elevations and depths ts,water, direction varied from northeast to northwest. Groundwater gradient
<br /> varied from 0.0002 to 0.04 ft/ft.
<br /> 7. Tabulated results of all sampling All data adequately tabu/arized in various reports,including closure report.
<br /> and analyses:
<br /> FYI Detection limits for confirmation
<br /> sampling
<br /> QY Lead analyses
<br /> 8. Concentration contours of contaminants found and those remaining in soil and The extent of the identified
<br /> groundwater, and both on-site and off-site: contamination shown in applicable
<br /> reports.
<br /> Y❑Lateral and ❑Y Vertical extent of soil contamination
<br /> FT Lateral and ry7 Vertical extent of groundwater contamination
<br /> 9. Zone of influence calculated and assumptions used for subsurface remediation Soil vapor extraction was the approved
<br /> system and the zone of capture attained for the soil and groundwater remediation engineered remediation.
<br /> system;
<br /> YJ 10.Reports/information �Y Unauthorized Release Form DY QMRs 8/03 to 2/10
<br /> FY] Well and boring logs PAR �y FRP ❑Y Other Soil Vapor Report(12/10), Closure Report(2/11)
<br /> Y 11.Best Available Technology(BAT) used or an explanation fornot USTs removal and natural attenuation.
<br /> using BAT,
<br /> Y 12. Reasons why background was/is Minor residual soil and groundwater contamination remains on-site.
<br /> ttainable usin BAT,'
<br /> The consultant estimated approximately 91 lbs of TPHg remain in soil
<br /> y 13.Mass balance calculation of substance treated
<br /> versus that remaining, and 0.11 lbs remain in groundwater.
<br /> Y 14. Assumptions, parameters, calculations and A soil vapor survey passed the Region 2 commercial vapor ESLs and
<br /> model used in risk assessments, and fate and CaIEPA CHHSLs. Residual TPHg and MTBE in soil exceeded the gross
<br /> transport modeling; contamination and direct exposure ESLs, but contamination is located
<br /> below 15.5'b s which is below typical worker exposure depth.
<br /> 15. Rationale why conditions remaining at site Soil and groundwater contamination reportedly is limited in extent.
<br /> will not adversely impact water quality, health, or Land use(commercial)is not expected to change in the foreseeable
<br /> other beneficial uses;and future. Vapor intrusion and soil risk has been addressed. Water quality
<br /> goals will be reached in 2016.
<br /> By: JLC Comments: In November 1993 a dispenser piping release was observed and reported by the local agency.In
<br /> January 1999, one 12,000-gallon and two 10,000-gallon "fuel"USTs were removed at the subject Site. Based
<br /> Date: upon 21 quarters of groundwater monitoring showing a stable plume with declining concentrations, no
<br /> 11/22/2011 threats to domestic and public supply wells, the limited extent of contamination remaining in soil and
<br /> groundwater, no foreseeable changes in land use, and limited threats from groundwater,soil and soil vapor
<br />
|